Interactive Whiteboards - Forging forward or holding teaching and learning back?

The IWB.


The last 20 years has seen rapid technological advancement. Hall & Higgins (2005).Teachers and educators are at times being left behind by this rapid succession of new technologies as educators are tending to use the same applications and tools that they used 20 to 30 years ago. Sousa (2001) and Walker-Tileston 2004). Children today are far more technologically advanced and digitally literate and so too should our teaching. Webb &Way (2005). Web 2.0 applications, the internet and new technologies are taking a hold in our society and as educators we need to prepare ourselves to adapt and adopt new pedagogical practices to reflect this. Sousa (2001) and Walker-Tileston 2004). The IWB is one such technology that is forging a name for itself as fast becoming one of the most popular new technologies in schools around the world. The IWB is popular with teachers and students alike and its potential is yet to be fully realised. Kennewell (2006).
I have taught in London for 2 years and as far back as 2006 when I first went to London to teach the IWB was commonplace in all primary schools. Planning, teaching and assesment were all conducted on the IWB and flip charts were created for each lesson of the day and teachers were expected to incorporate IWB into their daily lessons over all curriculum areas.
I found it difficult coming into this system as I had never even heard of the IWB before let alone having to use it for teaching. I think that what it became was a replacement for the whiteboard in the more traditional sense. Almost instantly I had a fear and distrust of this new technology as my limited ability to use it stopped me from really exploring its capabilities.
On my second trip to teach in London the IWB phenomenon was even more widespread. Traditional whiteboards had completley disappeared and everything that was now written was done on the IWB.
I could see the benefits of the IWB for use as as a whiteboard , a projector screen, a copy board, or a computer projector. Children can write on the screen with pens and or use the computer to add or alter images. Internet can be viewed, movies played, and programmes used to integrate material from the internet , word programmes, photos, videos clips as well as teacher and student annotations into new presentations or existing work. (Glover et al 2005).

With all these possiblities in mind I could still not get to terms with it. I found it ever so difficult to go into a well established system whereby all teachers were fully trained and those beginning teachers were being taught the necessary skills during training. What therefore could I do other than muddle through.
Teachers in England I felt over used it. They used it for handwriting, which created an unrealistic view of the handwriting process, they used it for alot of whole class teaching which changed learning from child centred to traditional methods of teaching, whereby the teacher was the transmittor of knowledge rather than the facilitator. It also created more work for the teacher as each lesson was lead through and planned on a flipchart where the teacher would teach with the set of notes on the IWB. I felt this truely restricted the engagement in learning.

My first assignment was on the IWB as I felt that I never really used it the way I shouldve. I wanted to see if there was any educational benefits for children and what the theory was behind its widespread use in England and what things if any had NZ done to implement IWB use.
I found that Project Activate was funded by a grant from the Digital Opportunities project, which is a joint initiative between the New Zealand Ministry of Education, ICT related businesses and enterprises and state and integrated schools. (Digital Opportunities Project, 2005). The project was implemented in two stages with a study of schools looking and how IWB could be integrated as an effective teaching tool. The second stage involved looking at the findings from the first study and assessing if changes needed to be made and if so where and how the project could improve learning and teaching. Five Auckland and 10 Southland schools and colleges were involved in the pilot. Teachers were trained on an ongoing basis to use the whiteboard through workshops, face-to-face and video conference meetings between schools. (Digital Opportunities Project, 2005).
Schools were encouraged to use the technology to aid and enhance cooperative, distance and inquiry-based learning. It was believed that the IWB could provide a tool that could help these pilot schools to use an enquiry based approach to teaching and learning, whereby students could orchestrate their own learning and work collaboratively with each other. The project encouraged using the IWB to provide greater interaction with teaching materials and as a means of communicating with other schools on the project. Teaching were encouraged to think beyond the square to new and innovative ways of using the resource which could then be shared with other schools on the project to create a new and exciting learning environment. The study found that in every school involved in the project student engagement and motivation was at a high level. Encouraging words for a newly introduced technology (Digital Opportunities Project, 2005)

I found that indeed the IWB carries with it many educational benefits for children but without proper training and use it simply replicates existing teaching pedagogies. Teachers need to therefore having pre-service training and then ongoing PD throughout their teaching practise.
l